I think this article puts the euphemism 'social perfectionism' on the subtle, and in some cases blatant anti-male stance that pervades US and UK society today.
Sports teams fall over themselves to wear pink for Mother's Day, hardly anyone celebrates Father's Day. [1] Time Magazine publishes an article on how "Men are Obsolete". [2] Politicians routinely trumpet the 77% pay gap despite it being "more complicated than that" at best, and false at worst. [3] Fathers are routinely mocked and disparaged in TV commercials, and shown as the bumbling idiot. [4] A Columbia student has gained national acclaim after doing a "art performance" accusing a fellow student of rape [5] while he (despite having been cleared by the University) is still a pariah. [6] Meanwhile, a female teacher in California who had sex with her 14-year old male student gets only two years in prison (note that the article doesn't ever say "rape", even though it is statutory rape).[7]
Given these, is it any surprise that the average man who is mocked by society thinks of committing suicide after his wife commits infidelity multiple times, and then gets the house through no-fault divorce laws? This has nothing to do with so-called perfectionism.
To be fair, the article covers this in one succinct sentence in the middle, which is, "In the UK and other Western societies, it sometimes feels as if we collectively decided, at some point around the mid-1980s, that men are awful." -- which I think is a far more accurate statement.
I thought references to what I was saying would be helpful, to prove that I wasn't talking out my bottom. Hence, I was trying to give references from major newspapers and other media resources that backed up things that I knew from memory. A lot of other assertions in this thread (or indeed in a lot of HN threads) don't do this, so I assumed it was a positive.
> prefabricated lists of links and talking points
As I said in another comment, a lot
of things can't be verified over the Internet, but I will tell you that my list wasn't prefabricated. I wrote that paragraph (or a rough skeleton of it) from the various anti-male things I had seen in the media (not very difficult, IMO); and then took the time to search for the exact details, and added in the references.
I do agree that it is a hodgepodge of various things, which significantly detracts from its quality. I'll try to narrow down my comments in the future as well.
Men aren't killing themselves because nobody celebrates fathers day. And they're not killing themselves because sitcom dads are morons. They're killing themselves because they feel they have failed the people around them, and can't live with the shame. This pressure to succeed was not invented by feminists, and has existed for many years. Both women and men unconsciously perpetuate a toxic idea of masculinity which keeps men from seeking help,
This masculinity is the cause of your other problems too:
Nobody celebrates father's day because according to society's version of masculinity, men aren't allowed to be sentimental. Getting cards and flowers isn't exactly a manly thing.
Male victims of statutory rape are rarely considered to be victims, because according to our twisted view of masculinity, males are always supposed to want sex. Everytime a female teacher is caught having sex with an underage male student, someone jokes that the young student "scored a hot babe" or something to that effect.
Men on TV are bumbling idiots because men are the primary audience for these shows. The protagonists are always average, unremakable men so that the average man can identify with them. The women characters are always sharp witted and shrewd because they are the antagonists.
And for every bumbling idiot dad on a television, there are 10 other shows with a lead male character and an attractive, but not-all-that-helpful supporting female. And don't even get me started about shows like "Say Yes to the Dress" and "Bridezillas" :-p It goes both ways.
It's ridiculous to talk about how bad the situation is for men on TV, when a lot of movies don't even pass the bechdel test which has the following criterias: (1) it has to have at least two women in it, who (2) who talk to each other, about (3) something besides a man.
Terrible cases for sure but none makes being a man any harder than being a woman. Life can be equally shit. I just think women vent things off better than men do.
>> Having sex with someone without their consent is rape, but that doesn't automatically mean it's a bad thing.
Penal code begs to differ. But it is refreshing to see actual rape apologist in the wild.
>> If a woman "raped" me, didn't get pregnant by it, didn't give me any skanky diseases, and didn't publicly accuse me of being the rapist, then I'd probably enjoy it. At worst, it might be a slight inconvenience for me.
You seems to know little about such cases and their psychological consequences. Difference in reaction of victims of different gender is minuscule. Shattered self evaluation, acute stress disorder, PTSD etc.
>>> that doesn't automatically mean it's a bad thing.
>> Penal code begs to differ.
> It's well known on the Internet (at least) that legal and illegal aren't the definitions of good and bad.
Its well known among lawyers that things that are in Penal Code are Bad as in "whole society think that such behavior is unacceptable and should be punished". This is the main defining characteristic that separates material in Penal Code from stuff in Civil Code. And since its HN, I assume that you know set theory and I don't have to explain what does follows and what does not.
>> Shattered self evaluation, acute stress disorder, PTSD etc.
> Of course if you only ask people who found it bad enough that they had to talk to someone about it...
You know that some percentage of violent rape women victims actually reach orgasm?
>> That's not how child abuse works.
> I thought we were talking about a horny male 14 year old.
So if I'll find a horny female 14 year old I can totally "sex her up"?
You should probably read once again your posts. Your views on subject are already known, now why don't you think of potential social consequences of this fact.
> Having sex with someone without their consent is rape, but that doesn't automatically mean it's a bad thing.
Yes, it does.
> If a woman "raped" me, didn't get pregnant by it, didn't give me any skanky diseases, and didn't publicly accuse me of being the rapist, then I'd probably enjoy it.
Having the same name as an often-violent crime doesn't automatically mean something is that bad.
Squashing an insect and setting a mouse trap are technically killing, but there's nothing wrong with them.
I think you first need to admit that it's at least conceivably possible that your emotion overreaction is compromising your objectivity on this subject.
Unless she's bending it, squeezing them, or using a strap-on, the woman thing is a complete non-issue in terms of actual consequences. If men and women are different, I just can't see how a woman raping is supposed to be equally as bad as a man raping.
Acting shocked at something doesn't make you right.
What can I say, I just can't see how there's much difference between 1) a woman being very forward with you and 2) a woman being very, very forward with you. There is a difference, but it's a difference in degree. If one is a good thing it's pretty unlikely that the other is a heinous, horrible thing.
I don't see how it would very traumatic any more than a woman hitting would be very painful: possible, but not the most likely outcome.
There is a bias there. The reporting is often disgusting - "hot teachers fuck their students".
A small part of the problem is that rape is defined as penetration by a penis. See for example the UK sexual offence act which jas several very serious criminal offences that carry the same penalty.
> The reporting is often disgusting - "hot teachers fuck their students".
I have never seen that sort of wording in mainstream news outlets. Tabloids like the Daily Mail -- possibly. But one thing in common is that they almost never call it rape when the perpetrator is female, which it is in the case I linked (look up CA law on the subject). On the other hand, even when it is an unproven accusation against a male, they freely use the word without even bothering to add "alleged".
> A small part of the problem is that rape is defined as penetration by a penis.
Apart from the fact that your linked laws are UK ones, and the case I was referring to was CA in the US -- how is this a "small part of the problem"? It is a huge problem if laws literally say that only men can rape.
I think some part of this disconnect might be due to the differences between US and UK reporting. I'm guessing UK tabloids sensationalize stuff more but are also more careful about actual allegations due to stricter libel laws, whereas US media is more directly anti-male in its reporting.
Why do you think I recommend prison? I don't. I advocate a change in society so that people with destructive paraphilias can get support to live with those paraphilias without raping children -- and yes, teenagers are children. That's why we don't let them fight wars or run for office or do a bunch of other stuff.
huh? I hardly feel threatened by basically everything you just listed there. Do you?
I get the feeling if you asked most women: "Do you think men are awful?" The answer would be "Yes but we love them anyway."
and, to be on a less cutsey point.
There was a time in my life where I was seriously depressed, and it was not because I thought society treated men poorly on average. It was because I thought I would have no place in society.
So at the very least for this poster, my experience directly contradicts you. Hardly scientific, but I trust my own eyes.
> I hardly feel threatened by basically everything you just listed there. Do you?
Seeing a bias and pointing it out does not equal "being threatened". Would you speak this way to a woman who was pointing out, say, anti-female bias in hackathon results?
> I get the feeling if you asked most women: "Do you think men are awful?" The answer would be "Yes but we love them anyway."
The fact that you accept the "yes" at the beginning of that answer reflexively illustrates my point precisely. Remember that the adjective I used to describe majority of the bias I referred to was subtle, not blatant.
> There was a time in my life where I was seriously depressed, and it was not because I thought society treated men poorly on average. It was because I thought I would have no place in society. So at the very least for this poster, my experience directly contradicts you.
I think you are misconstruing my post as a reflection of my life situation. Nothing is really verifiable over the Internet, but I can assure you that it is not.
huh? No. I was talking about my life only. I'm sure you're wonderful.
To be clear, I don't actually believe that the thought "Society treats men so poorly, and I'm a man" is a thought that is pushing you towards depression, or anyone to depression. I don't believe would depress anyone. I do believe it outrages you. I would agree, some of those things seem pretty outrageous!
I'd have a hard time believing you were actually depressed if you were to assert that the reason you were depressed is because you didn't like the way society treated men. I would not believe that at all. It would deeply contradict my experience with depression.
> It would deeply contradict my experience with depression.
And I think that that is where the problem is. You are assuming that your personal, anecdotal experience with depression is representative of all cases of depression for everybody.
It's dangerous to make assumptions about why a comment was downvoted. Such assumptions can lead to a growing gulf of misunderstanding and resentment, even to seeing enemies where there are none.
sure, blaming things willy nilly when you have little substantiative proof can clearly produce some highly antagonistic and overly entrenched thinkers. I C what you did there.
Oh now wait a sec there. I'm not sure you and I are on the same wavelength here.
Just to contextualize this. I just got done watching the pilot episodes of bee and puppycat [1], I was feeling very very mellow at the time of writing. It's hard to believe that people perceived any aggressive posturing or tone there.
I'm always interested in improving my communication skills, and it seems my writing style has included a posture that I did not mean to convey! Can you tell me what contributed to the tone you detected? I simply am not able to detect it, and that may simply be because it's hard to critique you're own writing.
No kidding. I really thought Hacker News was better than this, but a large number of the replies here are little more than parroted MRA talking points and other myopic comments.
Sports teams fall over themselves to wear pink for Mother's Day, hardly anyone celebrates Father's Day. [1] Time Magazine publishes an article on how "Men are Obsolete". [2] Politicians routinely trumpet the 77% pay gap despite it being "more complicated than that" at best, and false at worst. [3] Fathers are routinely mocked and disparaged in TV commercials, and shown as the bumbling idiot. [4] A Columbia student has gained national acclaim after doing a "art performance" accusing a fellow student of rape [5] while he (despite having been cleared by the University) is still a pariah. [6] Meanwhile, a female teacher in California who had sex with her 14-year old male student gets only two years in prison (note that the article doesn't ever say "rape", even though it is statutory rape).[7]
Given these, is it any surprise that the average man who is mocked by society thinks of committing suicide after his wife commits infidelity multiple times, and then gets the house through no-fault divorce laws? This has nothing to do with so-called perfectionism.
To be fair, the article covers this in one succinct sentence in the middle, which is, "In the UK and other Western societies, it sometimes feels as if we collectively decided, at some point around the mid-1980s, that men are awful." -- which I think is a far more accurate statement.
[1] http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/granderson-met-ya...
[2] http://time.com/179/men-are-obsolete/
[3] http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/08/gende...
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGCTFjFiNu4
[5] http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/10/29...
[6] http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/03/columbia-st...
[7] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/07/amy-beck-gets-2-yea...